The president has outlined his high class government programs and policy ideas for improving the economic stagnation of the middle class. Just who belongs in this group is undefined but it’s a nice catch-all phrase that can be manipulated at will.

Suffice it to say that the middle class encompasses the largest group of citizens and prospective voters, so appealing to it is smart politics unless, of course, the prescribed policies proclaimed as ameliorative are in fact ineffective, or worse, the opposite. It doesn’t take much to see through the smoke and mirrors.

One of the proposals is the call for more “infrastructure investment.” We have heard this one before and seen its implementation in the $850 billion stimulus package approved in 2009, about a third of which was for such “investments.” The idea was to provide money to local governments that would in turn fund “shovel ready” projects sitting dormant for lack of cash.

On its face this approach appears plausible and many economists who favor government spending as an economic growth job creating tool are strong advocates. The problem, however, is that “shovel ready projects” for instantaneous “go-ahead” rarely exist. And if they did, local entities would have little trouble funding those that are of vital necessity. Moreover, federal government funding is almost always linked to projects employing only higher paid union workers making costs significantly higher. Additionally federal government “infrastructure investment” has a history of political cronyism favoring wasteful, unnecessary projects.

Another proposal calls for government job training programs to get the unemployed back to work with saleable skills. Again, this sounds good, but the reality is different. Currently, there are some 50 overlapping job training programs administered by no less than nine federal agencies. A 2012 study conducted by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) found the programs to be brimming with fraud and abuse.

According to Senator Tom Coburn, who commissioned the report, “the vast majority of money we spend in job training doesn’t go to job training; it goes to employ people in those job training federal programs.” Annually, about $18 billion is spent on these programs with little effect.

A third proposal is the old standard call for an increase in the minimum wage. The logic here is to put more money in consumers’ pockets, leading to a higher standard of living and more spending in the economy — all to be paid for by the private sector. The reason this doesn’t work is simple. Businesses forced to pay higher wages will cut back on hiring. Accompanying increased taxes also provide disincentives. Minimum wage increases kill jobs, especially for those needing them most.

There were other proposals in the president’s suggestions such as expanded prekindergarten programs and policies for reducing college costs. These too would have questionable benefits. What would really help end middle class income stagnation is a vibrant growing economy. History has shown this to be possible with less interference and fewer federal government help programs.